"Pressed on the issue, she agreed that even the chief veterinary officer should be removed if he didn't sign up to the view on climate change also taken by the Green Party."
I also think that on balance this tough and hostile line taken by rUK is more likely to help the "Yes" campaign than the supporters of the Union.
Yes but you are looking at this from a Scottish perspective.
How long do you think a RUK government that allowed Scotland a say in its currency would last? Especially with the tories against, and in a parliament shorn of 40 Labour MPs.
The current confusion is deeply political: the SNP are frightened to admit the euro is where they will end up, the rUK establishment is frightened to admit that if given the choice of Scotland being in a monetary union with sterling or in the euro they would vastly prefer the former option.
Where do you get that idea from. I think given the choice of Scotland having the Euro or being tied to the £ we would prefer Scotland to be tied to the Euro.
Unless, of course, your banks are fully under Bank of England control in which case Scotland would definitely prefer the Euro to £....
David L I think both you and Richard Nabavi are missing the point that the Czech/Slovak monetary split occurred before the creation of the euro. My understanding of at least ECB thinking on this, based on its and its predecessors attitude to the Slovak case particularly, would be that the Scots would use the pound for a relatively short transitional period before joining the euro. Obviously then the debt position would be of some significance as inflation should not be an issue. The current confusion is deeply political: the SNP are frightened to admit the euro is where they will end up, the rUK establishment is frightened to admit that if given the choice of Scotland being in a monetary union with sterling or in the euro they would vastly prefer the former option. I also think that on balance this tough and hostile line taken by rUK is more likely to help the "Yes" campaign than the supporters of the Union. As a strong Unionist I therefore think it regrettable that the English are appearing to want to treat the Scots post independence as more foreign than the French currently treat the Germans.
No I was aware this was all pre-Euro by some years. It was in 1993. In fact the Czech republic is still not a member of the Euro although I understand that the currency is heavily used in business in that country.
I don't the rUK would vastly prefer Scotland to be in a sterling currency union than members of the EZ. That is not what the politicians of all 3 parties are saying and I see no reason to not believe them. Indeed, if you read Osborne's speech, it is clear this has been given serious thought and the opposite conclusion has been reached.
Whether this helps or hinders the Yes campaign is harder to say. I tend to agree with Sean T that it will help in the short term but hinder more in the medium term once people think through the implications but we really need polling as this is no more than a hunch.
Oh dear. The PB tories and far right wingers on PB are shrieking even more hysterically than usual.
One day it might dawn on them that they are very far from the target audience and that there is a reason there are more pandas than tory MPs in scotland. If the Yes campaign upsets the right wing headbangers on PB so much then it's clearly on the right track.
You may continue shrieking now.
Not just that, they have also clearly been spamming the BBC website
LOL
Posted on here without a hint of irony. This is comedy gold. Even more amusing than when so many of the PB tories were cheering on Osbrowne's omnishambles.
Crack on, Pork, and stick like glue to your tried and tested technique of never seeking to make a substantive point about anything at all. Except of course the pandas/tory mps one, because that is a joke which never loses its first freshness.
I am interested in this notion that you have to be right wing to believe that the SNP leadership's version of how the independence process will work is deeply flawed. That must make Jim Sillars and Patrick Harvie right wing. Blimey.
It has been Nichola "give us the pound or we renege on our debts" Sturgeon as a shoo-in.....but after the Sterling zone disaster I have my doubts.....
Sturgeon's shackled to Salmond like a Mafioso's concrete overcoat. Who's behind her in the queue?
Are you willing to lay her at evens as next leader of the SNP then? If so I would like to reserve my place at the top of the queue.
Lay Nicola Sturgeon? No thank you.
How funny and original.
So your opinion is so useless you're not prepared to back it with hard cash? I think most of us suspected that already.
Bad day at the office Neil? I asked a question - what's your problem pal?
I'm just disappointed you're not prepared to back up your opinions with cash. Havent you heard of the cost-of-living crisis?
So, do you think Salmond would step down, post a 'No' vote or not?
I havent offered an opinion on the issue. I was simply looking for another good value bet on pbc about the next SNP leader. I was quite prepared to wait years for a payout.
taffys. I am looking at it from the point of view of preserving the Union, the loss of which I think would be a disaster for everyone, not least England. But were it to come about as you say, I would be surprised if even a Con/UKIP rUK administration would prefer to see the Scots in the euro rather than in Sterling. Of course the issue of rUK EU membership would loom large in this as well.
Do you not see the strategic flaw with Osborne telling Scots they can't do something?
Who would you have tell the Scots that the SNP's claims on the pound are bogus and that rUK will not sign up to a currency union, if not the CoE, which ever party or nationality he is from?
Whether it's better for "Yes" or "No" is neither here nor there - it's better for the campaign in total. The Scots will make a better informed decision and that can only be a good thing.
There appears to now be several groups of Scottish voters. 1) Those who will vote Yes because they hate England, the English and all things to do with the 1966 World Cup 2) Those who will vote Yes because they believe Scotland should be an independent country regardless of the financial and other consequences 3) Those who will vote Yes because they frankly only take from the state so have nothing to lose 4) Those who will vote Yes because they genuinely believe an independent Scotland will be an improvement on Scotland within the UK 5) Those who will vote Yes because Eck is never wrong 6) Those who will vote Yes because they cant stand being told what to do and what is good for them. They can decide that for themselves.
7) Those who wont vote or simply haven't a clue and if they vote, will decide at the last minute, possibly when in the voting booth.
8) Those who will vote No because they are unionist and believe in the UK even with all its flaws 9) Those who will vote No because they believe Keeping Together is the right thing to do for economic reasons 10) Those who will vote No because they cant stand Eck or the SNP
In the coming months we will see the support for 1-6 and 8-10 hardening up. It is the side which can attract most from 7 who should win as the vote will be much closer than most expect.
I am interested in this notion that you have to be right wing to believe that the SNP leadership's version of how the independence process will work is deeply flawed.
I'm amused that the foremost PB Romney on here still doesn't understand just how toxic out of touch politicians can be to their own cause.
I guess a RUK government would prefer Scotland in sterling, but any RUK government that allowed Scotland A SAY in sterling, when it had just turned its back on England, would surely reap a whirlwind at the English ballot box.
Do you not see the strategic flaw with Osborne telling Scots they can't do something?
Who would you have tell the Scots that the SNP's claims on the pound are bogus and that rUK will not sign up to a currency union, if not the CoE, which ever party or nationality he is from?
Whether it's better for "Yes" or "No" is neither here nor there - it's better for the campaign in total. The Scots will make a better informed decision and that can only be a good thing.
Sorry but I want to win. The last person I would chose to make this announcement is someone who is universally despised in Scotland.
Does Salmond actually believe what he is saying? It is clear to anyone neutral that there will not be a sterling currency union as he envisages, post a YES vote. The economic case is made plain, here:
Moreover, polls show that rUK voters want nothing to do with a currency union. So it really is NOT going to happen - or not in any form that would be acceptable to a newly independent Scotland.
Salmond is not an idiot, indeed he is an economist, so he must realise this. That leaves us with two options: he is a bare faced liar, or he is genuinely and bizarrely deluded (or maybe he is an idiot after all).
What do people think?
And what do the Scots think? Do they honestly believe the ludicrous notion that the entire British establishment is lying? Or will they recognize the evidence that Salmond is fibbing, or delusional?
It's on that question that the referendum will turn.
As I said downthread I think it is very surprising that Salmond has been willing to risk pretty much all of his credibility on this issue. In poker terms he is now all in and with an extremely weak hand.
I don't understand why he has done it. Has he got too used to getting his own way in the Scottish Parliament? Has the pathetic nature of the Scottish media lulled him into a false sense of security? Or was he just desperate to get English tories front and central no matter what the risks and what the price was?
He may be able to bluster his way out of this but it is high risk and strange tactics for someone who is supposedly a clever politician.
Do you not see the strategic flaw with Osborne telling Scots they can't do something?
Who would you have tell the Scots that the SNP's claims on the pound are bogus and that rUK will not sign up to a currency union, if not the CoE, which ever party or nationality he is from?
Whether it's better for "Yes" or "No" is neither here nor there - it's better for the campaign in total. The Scots will make a better informed decision and that can only be a good thing.
Sorry but I want to win. The last person I would chose to make this announcement is someone who is universally despised in Scotland.
If you believe the Scots are so sensitive that they will make a decision on Independence based on who gives a speech on the prospects of a currency union, then you have already lost.
I guess a RUK government would prefer Scotland in sterling, but any RUK government that allowed Scotland A SAY in sterling, when it had just turned its back on England, would surely reap a whirlwind at the English ballot box.
Does Salmond actually believe what he is saying? It is clear to anyone neutral that there will not be a sterling currency union as he envisages, post a YES vote. The economic case is made plain, here:
Moreover, polls show that rUK voters want nothing to do with a currency union. So it really is NOT going to happen - or not in any form that would be acceptable to a newly independent Scotland.
Salmond is not an idiot, indeed he is an economist, so he must realise this. That leaves us with two options: he is a bare faced liar, or he is genuinely and bizarrely deluded (or maybe he is an idiot after all).
What do people think?
And what do the Scots think? Do they honestly believe the ludicrous notion that the entire British establishment is lying? Or will they recognize the evidence that Salmond is fibbing, or delusional?
It's on that question that the referendum will turn.
As I said downthread I think it is very surprising that Salmond has been willing to risk pretty much all of his credibility on this issue. In poker terms he is now all in and with an extremely weak hand.
I don't understand why he has done it. Has he got too used to getting his own way in the Scottish Parliament? Has the pathetic nature of the Scottish media lulled him into a false sense of security? Or was he just desperate to get English tories front and central no matter what the risks and what the price was?
He may be able to bluster his way out of this but it is high risk and strange tactics for someone who is supposedly a clever politician.
Osbrowne, panda, ROFL.
It would be great to get an actual SNP supporter's actual response to the question you ask, but it isn't going to happen on here.
Do you not see the strategic flaw with Osborne telling Scots they can't do something?
Who would you have tell the Scots that the SNP's claims on the pound are bogus and that rUK will not sign up to a currency union, if not the CoE, which ever party or nationality he is from?
Whether it's better for "Yes" or "No" is neither here nor there - it's better for the campaign in total. The Scots will make a better informed decision and that can only be a good thing.
Sorry but I want to win. The last person I would chose to make this announcement is someone who is universally despised in Scotland.
Does Salmond actually believe what he is saying? It is clear to anyone neutral that there will not be a sterling currency union as he envisages, post a YES vote. The economic case is made plain, here:
Moreover, polls show that rUK voters want nothing to do with a currency union. So it really is NOT going to happen - or not in any form that would be acceptable to a newly independent Scotland.
Salmond is not an idiot, indeed he is an economist, so he must realise this. That leaves us with two options: he is a bare faced liar, or he is genuinely and bizarrely deluded (or maybe he is an idiot after all).
What do people think?
And what do the Scots think? Do they honestly believe the ludicrous notion that the entire British establishment is lying? Or will they recognize the evidence that Salmond is fibbing, or delusional?
It's on that question that the referendum will turn.
As I said downthread I think it is very surprising that Salmond has been willing to risk pretty much all of his credibility on this issue. In poker terms he is now all in and with an extremely weak hand.
I don't understand why he has done it. Has he got too used to getting his own way in the Scottish Parliament? Has the pathetic nature of the Scottish media lulled him into a false sense of security? Or was he just desperate to get English tories front and central no matter what the risks and what the price was?
He may be able to bluster his way out of this but it is high risk and strange tactics for someone who is supposedly a clever politician.
Osbrowne, panda, ROFL.
It would be great to get an actual SNP supporter's actual response to the question you ask, but it isn't going to happen on here.
Andrew Neil didn't have much luck with getting the deputy leader to answer any either
Perhaps Salmond thought labour would have been more conciliatory on the point of a currency union and was shocked that all three main parties spoke with a united voice.
Does Salmond actually believe what he is saying? It is clear to anyone neutral that there will not be a sterling currency union as he envisages, post a YES vote. The economic case is made plain, here:
Moreover, polls show that rUK voters want nothing to do with a currency union. So it really is NOT going to happen - or not in any form that would be acceptable to a newly independent Scotland.
Salmond is not an idiot, indeed he is an economist, so he must realise this. That leaves us with two options: he is a bare faced liar, or he is genuinely and bizarrely deluded (or maybe he is an idiot after all).
What do people think?
And what do the Scots think? Do they honestly believe the ludicrous notion that the entire British establishment is lying? Or will they recognize the evidence that Salmond is fibbing, or delusional?
It's on that question that the referendum will turn.
As I said downthread I think it is very surprising that Salmond has been willing to risk pretty much all of his credibility on this issue. In poker terms he is now all in and with an extremely weak hand.
I don't understand why he has done it. Has he got too used to getting his own way in the Scottish Parliament? Has the pathetic nature of the Scottish media lulled him into a false sense of security? Or was he just desperate to get English tories front and central no matter what the risks and what the price was?
He may be able to bluster his way out of this but it is high risk and strange tactics for someone who is supposedly a clever politician.
Osbrowne, panda, ROFL.
It would be great to get an actual SNP supporter's actual response to the question you ask, but it isn't going to happen on here.
Andrew Neil didn't have much luck with getting the deputy leader to answer any either
'Nicola Sturgeon told Andrew Neil that she wanted Scotland "to pay its fair share of debt", but added that it could not default on debt "that is not legally Scotland's".'
You seem perfectly happy with the way No is running the campaign. I wish I had your confidence.
Do you not see the strategic flaw with Osborne telling Scots they can't do something?
Typical patronising socialist - "I know best how the people think..."
Eh? What on earth are you talking about?
How do you know how the people of Scotland will react to a debate on currency.
A bit patronising to suggest anything other than a tiny tiny minority would immediately react to the nationality of the speaker - I speak here as a Scot.
I am interested in this notion that you have to be right wing to believe that the SNP leadership's version of how the independence process will work is deeply flawed.
I'm amused that the foremost PB Romney on here still doesn't understand just how toxic out of touch politicians can be to their own cause.
You'll grasp it one day perhaps.
I do grasp it. Clearly there is a sizeable part of the Scottish electorate that will automatically dismiss what Osborne has said. And his intervention may well win Yes the referendum - indeed, it seems a landslide in favour of independence could now be on the cards. And if that is the case I will welcome it as it will indicate an irreconcilable alienation of the Scots from the rest of the UK.
But that still does not explain why you think that anyone disagreeing with the SNP leadership's version of how things will unfold after a Yes is right wing.
There appears to now be several groups of Scottish voters. 6) Those who will vote Yes because they cant stand being told what to do and what is good for them. They can decide that for themselves.
This group seems to be the one who will apparently be swung by this currency exchange.
I can't help but wonder that if they really are voting for independence on this basis, they're having their vote dictated just as much as someone who does what George tells them, rather than joining the small and sober group who can simple observe that independence would be very dangerous for the economic health of Scotland.
I guess a RUK government would prefer Scotland in sterling, but any RUK government that allowed Scotland A SAY in sterling, when it had just turned its back on England, would surely reap a whirlwind at the English ballot box.
Why would we prefer that? With them in, we under-write their financial services industry. Under any other arrangement, we don't shoulder that burden for them, and most of their financial industries would move south of the border. Win win for rUK.
There appears to now be several groups of Scottish voters. 1) Those who will vote Yes because they hate England, the English and all things to do with the 1966 World Cup 2) Those who will vote Yes because they believe Scotland should be an independent country regardless of the financial and other consequences 3) Those who will vote Yes because they frankly only take from the state so have nothing to lose 4) Those who will vote Yes because they genuinely believe an independent Scotland will be an improvement on Scotland within the UK 5) Those who will vote Yes because Eck is never wrong 6) Those who will vote Yes because they cant stand being told what to do and what is good for them. They can decide that for themselves.
7) Those who wont vote or simply haven't a clue and if they vote, will decide at the last minute, possibly when in the voting booth.
8) Those who will vote No because they are unionist and believe in the UK even with all its flaws 9) Those who will vote No because they believe Keeping Together is the right thing to do for economic reasons 10) Those who will vote No because they cant stand Eck or the SNP
In the coming months we will see the support for 1-6 and 8-10 hardening up. It is the side which can attract most from 7 who should win as the vote will be much closer than most expect.
Good synopsis Easterross and given the NO campaign have next to no volunteers or local organisations and YES have vibrant organisations full of volunteers throughout the country it will be interesting to see if NO can maintain their position with only lies and the BBC for support.
Does Salmond actually believe what he is saying? It is clear to anyone neutral that there will not be a sterling currency union as he envisages, post a YES vote. The economic case is made plain, here:
Moreover, polls show that rUK voters want nothing to do with a currency union. So it really is NOT going to happen - or not in any form that would be acceptable to a newly independent Scotland.
Salmond is not an idiot, indeed he is an economist, so he must realise this. That leaves us with two options: he is a bare faced liar, or he is genuinely and bizarrely deluded (or maybe he is an idiot after all).
What do people think?
And what do the Scots think? Do they honestly believe the ludicrous notion that the entire British establishment is lying? Or will they recognize the evidence that Salmond is fibbing, or delusional?
It's on that question that the referendum will turn.
As I said downthread I think it is very surprising that Salmond has been willing to risk pretty much all of his credibility on this issue. In poker terms he is now all in and with an extremely weak hand.
I don't understand why he has done it. Has he got too used to getting his own way in the Scottish Parliament? Has the pathetic nature of the Scottish media lulled him into a false sense of security? Or was he just desperate to get English tories front and central no matter what the risks and what the price was?
He may be able to bluster his way out of this but it is high risk and strange tactics for someone who is supposedly a clever politician.
Osbrowne, panda, ROFL.
It would be great to get an actual SNP supporter's actual response to the question you ask, but it isn't going to happen on here.
Andrew Neil didn't have much luck with getting the deputy leader to answer any either
'Nicola Sturgeon told Andrew Neil that she wanted Scotland "to pay its fair share of debt", but added that it could not default on debt "that is not legally Scotland's".'
That was an extraordinary statement to make.
Funny, unionists are always shocked when confronted with the truth.
I am interested in this notion that you have to be right wing to believe that the SNP leadership's version of how the independence process will work is deeply flawed.
I'm amused that the foremost PB Romney on here still doesn't understand just how toxic out of touch politicians can be to their own cause.
You'll grasp it one day perhaps.
I do grasp it. Clearly there is a sizeable part of the Scottish electorate that will automatically dismiss what Osborne has said. And his intervention may well win Yes the referendum - indeed, it seems a landslide in favour of independence could now be on the cards. And if that is the case I will welcome it as it will indicate an irreconcilable alienation of the Scots from the rest of the UK.
But that still does not explain why you think that anyone disagreeing with the SNP leadership's version of how things will unfold after a Yes is right wing.
PB is dominated by far-right and right wing opinion. Hence the deafening shrieking from them on this issue despite it hardly being the first time the NO campaign have been banging away furiously on it. It started way back in 2012. Nor is it remotely surprising that those who seem offended by the very idea of Catalan Independence should join in with them.
I am interested in this notion that you have to be right wing to believe that the SNP leadership's version of how the independence process will work is deeply flawed.
I'm amused that the foremost PB Romney on here still doesn't understand just how toxic out of touch politicians can be to their own cause.
You'll grasp it one day perhaps.
I do grasp it. Clearly there is a sizeable part of the Scottish electorate that will automatically dismiss what Osborne has said. And his intervention may well win Yes the referendum - indeed, it seems a landslide in favour of independence could now be on the cards. And if that is the case I will welcome it as it will indicate an irreconcilable alienation of the Scots from the rest of the UK.
But that still does not explain why you think that anyone disagreeing with the SNP leadership's version of how things will unfold after a Yes is right wing.
PB is dominated by far-right and right wing opinion. Hence the deafening shrieking from them on this issue despite it hardly being the first time the NO campaign have been banging away furiously on it. It started way back in 2012. Nor is it remotely surprising that those who seem offended by the very idea of Catalan Independence should join in with them.
Got it. Anyone who disagrees with you is right wing.
Perhaps Salmond thought labour would have been more conciliatory on the point of a currency union and was shocked that all three main parties spoke with a united voice.
It's fair to say that Labour voters are not as opposed to sharing the pound as other parties' - but they are still opposed:
Net support sharing pound with Scotland- VI: Con: -58 Lab: -18 LibD: -38 UKIP: -68
Of course that Łab figure could be affected to an extent by Scottish Labour voters....
Does Salmond actually believe what he is saying? It is clear to anyone neutral that there will not be a sterling currency union as he envisages, post a YES vote. The economic case is made plain, here:
Moreover, polls show that rUK voters want nothing to do with a currency union. So it really is NOT going to happen - or not in any form that would be acceptable to a newly independent Scotland.
Salmond is not an idiot, indeed he is an economist, so he must realise this. That leaves us with two options: he is a bare faced liar, or he is genuinely and bizarrely deluded (or maybe he is an idiot after all).
What do people think?
And what do the Scots think? Do they honestly believe the ludicrous notion that the entire British establishment is lying? Or will they recognize the evidence that Salmond is fibbing, or delusional?
It's on that question that the referendum will turn.
As I said downthread I think it is very surprising that Salmond has been willing to risk pretty much all of his credibility on this issue. In poker terms he is now all in and with an extremely weak hand.
I don't understand why he has done it. Has he got too used to getting his own way in the Scottish Parliament? Has the pathetic nature of the Scottish media lulled him into a false sense of security? Or was he just desperate to get English tories front and central no matter what the risks and what the price was?
He may be able to bluster his way out of this but it is high risk and strange tactics for someone who is supposedly a clever politician.
Osbrowne, panda, ROFL.
It would be great to get an actual SNP supporter's actual response to the question you ask, but it isn't going to happen on here.
Andrew Neil didn't have much luck with getting the deputy leader to answer any either
'Nicola Sturgeon told Andrew Neil that she wanted Scotland "to pay its fair share of debt", but added that it could not default on debt "that is not legally Scotland's".'
That was an extraordinary statement to make.
Funny, unionists are always shocked when confronted with the truth.
Well, yes, Mr Osborne did say so recently - that the debt is 100% to be assigned to the UK, whatever happens with indy. Plus he evidently takes the view that EWNI would be the continuing state following on from the UK. So it is an entirelhy ordinary and accurate statement to make.
There appears to now be several groups of Scottish voters. 6) Those who will vote Yes because they cant stand being told what to do and what is good for them. They can decide that for themselves.
This group seems to be the one who will apparently be swung by this currency exchange.
I can't help but wonder that if they really are voting for independence on this basis, they're having their vote dictated just as much as someone who does what George tells them, rather than joining the small and sober group who can simple observe that independence would be very dangerous for the economic health of Scotland.
You people really are stupid, there are many options open re currency and Salmond is certainly not going to enlighten thick Westminster politicians to which order he has as his selection. He has chosen the one that he knows will stick in their craw and lo and behold they send Squeaky up to threaten us, queue their puppets in BBC frothing about it and dolts like Carlotta and many others prophesying doom etc. When contesting with donkeys , you feed them accordingly.
There appears to now be several groups of Scottish voters. 1) Those who will vote Yes because they hate England, the English and all things to do with the 1966 World Cup 2) Those who will vote Yes because they believe Scotland should be an independent country regardless of the financial and other consequences 3) Those who will vote Yes because they frankly only take from the state so have nothing to lose 4) Those who will vote Yes because they genuinely believe an independent Scotland will be an improvement on Scotland within the UK 5) Those who will vote Yes because Eck is never wrong 6) Those who will vote Yes because they cant stand being told what to do and what is good for them. They can decide that for themselves.
7) Those who wont vote or simply haven't a clue and if they vote, will decide at the last minute, possibly when in the voting booth.
8) Those who will vote No because they are unionist and believe in the UK even with all its flaws 9) Those who will vote No because they believe Keeping Together is the right thing to do for economic reasons 10) Those who will vote No because they cant stand Eck or the SNP
In the coming months we will see the support for 1-6 and 8-10 hardening up. It is the side which can attract most from 7 who should win as the vote will be much closer than most expect.
Good synopsis Easterross and given the NO campaign have next to no volunteers or local organisations and YES have vibrant organisations full of volunteers throughout the country it will be interesting to see if NO can maintain their position with only lies and the BBC for support.
Why on earth should GOTV and a ground campaign matter when Osborne and Cammie can be deployed at scottish public to the obvious delight of the PB tories? Who cares what will happen in the final weeks of the campaign. It certainly didn't bother labour in 2011, and how right they were about that.
''Come on, this is pbc, people arent interested in the substance of the argument (which I have engaged on quite a lot anyway).''
Neil regardless of whether a currency union with Scotland is in RUK's economic interest or not, such a policy is surely an impossible sell to the English electorate post Scottish independence. Impossible and suicidal.
Why else would labour and the libs fall in behind Osborne?
I am interested in this notion that you have to be right wing to believe that the SNP leadership's version of how the independence process will work is deeply flawed.
I'm amused that the foremost PB Romney on here still doesn't understand just how toxic out of touch politicians can be to their own cause.
You'll grasp it one day perhaps.
I do grasp it. Clearly there is a sizeable part of the Scottish electorate that will automatically dismiss what Osborne has said. And his intervention may well win Yes the referendum - indeed, it seems a landslide in favour of independence could now be on the cards. And if that is the case I will welcome it as it will indicate an irreconcilable alienation of the Scots from the rest of the UK.
But that still does not explain why you think that anyone disagreeing with the SNP leadership's version of how things will unfold after a Yes is right wing.
PB is dominated by far-right and right wing opinion. Hence the deafening shrieking from them on this issue despite it hardly being the first time the NO campaign have been banging away furiously on it. It started way back in 2012. Nor is it remotely surprising that those who seem offended by the very idea of Catalan Independence should join in with them.
Got it. Anyone who disagrees with you is right wing.
Really? I thought you had moved on from your cretinous "prejudice" remarks when anyone dared mention how out of touch a politician is. This is becoming almost as embarrassing for you as your Romney stupidity. By all means keep it up if you think it is productive.
I am interested in this notion that you have to be right wing to believe that the SNP leadership's version of how the independence process will work is deeply flawed.
I'm amused that the foremost PB Romney on here still doesn't understand just how toxic out of touch politicians can be to their own cause.
You'll grasp it one day perhaps.
I do grasp it. Clearly there is a sizeable part of the Scottish electorate that will automatically dismiss what Osborne has said. And his intervention may well win Yes the referendum - indeed, it seems a landslide in favour of independence could now be on the cards. And if that is the case I will welcome it as it will indicate an irreconcilable alienation of the Scots from the rest of the UK.
But that still does not explain why you think that anyone disagreeing with the SNP leadership's version of how things will unfold after a Yes is right wing.
PB is dominated by far-right and right wing opinion. Hence the deafening shrieking from them on this issue despite it hardly being the first time the NO campaign have been banging away furiously on it. It started way back in 2012. Nor is it remotely surprising that those who seem offended by the very idea of Catalan Independence should join in with them.
Got it. Anyone who disagrees with you is right wing.
I think Salmonds position as First Minister would be safe following a No vote, as least in the short term. While Sturgeon would be the obvious person to follow, she too is a very vocal part of the Yes campaign. I suspect their fortunes are tied, whatever the result.
Does Salmond actually believe what he is saying? It is clear to anyone neutral that there will not be a sterling currency union as he envisages, post a YES vote. The economic case is made plain, here:
Moreover, polls show that rUK voters want nothing to do with a currency union. So it really is NOT going to happen - or not in any form that would be acceptable to a newly independent Scotland.
Salmond is not an idiot, indeed he is an economist, so he must realise this. That leaves us with two options: he is a bare faced liar, or he is genuinely and bizarrely deluded (or maybe he is an idiot after all).
It's on that question that the referendum will turn.
Osbrowne, panda, ROFL.
It would be great to get an actual SNP supporter's actual response to the question you ask, but it isn't going to happen on here.
Andrew Neil didn't have much luck with getting the deputy leader to answer any either
'Nicola Sturgeon told Andrew Neil that she wanted Scotland "to pay its fair share of debt", but added that it could not default on debt "that is not legally Scotland's".'
That was an extraordinary statement to make.
Funny, unionists are always shocked when confronted with the truth.
Well, yes, Mr Osborne did say so recently - that the debt is 100% to be assigned to the UK, whatever happens with indy. Plus he evidently takes the view that EWNI would be the continuing state following on from the UK. So it is an entirelhy ordinary and accurate statement to make.
It never fails to surprise me on here , droves of frothing Tories who have no clue on reality. Also the 2 or 3 who claim to be Scottish but have not a balanced opinion ever to give on the topic, riven with vitriol and hatred for Scotland and SNP. Yes I mean you sad individuals , Carlotta , Scottp and TGOHF, pretendy Scots.
f course that Łab figure could be affected to an extent by Scottish Labour voters....
And that's a point that's perhaps being missed. Scottish secession would change England. Undoubtedly. And perhaps change it quite radically. Perhaps change it more than Scotland.
I am interested in this notion that you have to be right wing to believe that the SNP leadership's version of how the independence process will work is deeply flawed.
I'm amused that the foremost PB Romney on here still doesn't understand just how toxic out of touch politicians can be to their own cause.
You'll grasp it one day perhaps.
I do grasp it. Clearly there is a sizeable part of the Scottish electorate that will automatically dismiss what Osborne has said. And his intervention may well win Yes the referendum - indeed, it seems a landslide in favour of independence could now be on the cards. And if that is the case I will welcome it as it will indicate an irreconcilable alienation of the Scots from the rest of the UK.
But that still does not explain why you think that anyone disagreeing with the SNP leadership's version of how things will unfold after a Yes is right wing.
PB is dominated by far-right and right wing opinion. Hence the deafening shrieking from them on this issue despite it hardly being the first time the NO campaign have been banging away furiously on it. It started way back in 2012. Nor is it remotely surprising that those who seem offended by the very idea of Catalan Independence should join in with them.
Got it. Anyone who disagrees with you is right wing.
Really? I thought you had moved on from your cretinous "prejudice" remarks when anyone dared mention how out of touch a politician is. This is becoming almost as embarrassing for you as your Romney stupidity. By all means keep it up if you think it is productive.
Mick - I fear I am not embarrassed to question your labelling of people according to whether they share your opinions or not. I will, however, give up on hoping to get an answer from you on why it is right wing to disagree with the SNP leadership's version of Scotland's independence settlement.
There appears to now be several groups of Scottish voters. 6) Those who will vote Yes because they cant stand being told what to do and what is good for them. They can decide that for themselves.
This group seems to be the one who will apparently be swung by this currency exchange.
I can't help but wonder that if they really are voting for independence on this basis, they're having their vote dictated just as much as someone who does what George tells them, rather than joining the small and sober group who can simple observe that independence would be very dangerous for the economic health of Scotland.
As yet we have no evidence (beyond one anecdote downthread) that Scots will swing to YES because they dislike being lectured by Osborne (et al). I'm not saying they don't exist, but let's wait and see.
Moreover, it is equally likely that a bunch of Don't Knows will be frightened by the vagueness of Salmond's currency plans, now so cruelly exposed (along with the EU stuff) and will swing to NO.
It will probably be a month before we see the full effect of all this on the polls.
What we do know is that, apparently, the Better Together campaign furiously focus-grouped their "no sterling zone" policy, weeks before Osborne stood up and said it: and all these focus groups told them that risk and doubt would be good for NO.
"The [currency zone] announcement, which has reportedly been prepared for months following relentless focus group testing, took the Scottish National party (SNP) by surprise."
LOL, dear dear , we asked a few rich tories in Scotland and they all say this will be beezer idea, send Squeaky up to tell those peasants they cannot use the pound. That will scare them into voting NO the ungrateful bounders. Just to crown it get our poodle from EU to compare them with murderers , say they will be cast out and it will be game set and match.
There appears to now be several groups of Scottish voters. 6) Those who will vote Yes because they cant stand being told what to do and what is good for them. They can decide that for themselves.
This group seems to be the one who will apparently be swung by this currency exchange.
I can't help but wonder that if they really are voting for independence on this basis, they're having their vote dictated just as much as someone who does what George tells them, rather than joining the small and sober group who can simple observe that independence would be very dangerous for the economic health of Scotland.
Meanwhile as the right-wingers shriek away in utter futility it appears that little Ed has told calamity Clegg precisely where to go on any theoretical lib-lab pact.
Does Salmond actually believe what he is saying? It is clear to anyone neutral that there will not be a sterling currency union as he envisages, post a YES vote. The economic case is made plain, here:
Moreover, polls show that rUK voters want nothing to do with a currency union. So it really is NOT going to happen - or not in any form that would be acceptable to a newly independent Scotland.
Salmond is not an idiot, indeed he is an economist, so he must realise this. That leaves us with two options: he is a bare faced liar, or he is genuinely and bizarrely deluded (or maybe he is an idiot after all).
It's on that question that the referendum will turn.
Osbrowne, panda, ROFL.
It would be great to get an actual SNP supporter's actual response to the question you ask, but it isn't going to happen on here.
Andrew Neil didn't have much luck with getting the deputy leader to answer any either
'Nicola Sturgeon told Andrew Neil that she wanted Scotland "to pay its fair share of debt", but added that it could not default on debt "that is not legally Scotland's".'
That was an extraordinary statement to make.
Funny, unionists are always shocked when confronted with the truth.
Well, yes, Mr Osborne did say so recently - that the debt is 100% to be assigned to the UK, whatever happens with indy. Plus he evidently takes the view that EWNI would be the continuing state following on from the UK. So it is an entirelhy ordinary and accurate statement to make.
riven with vitriol and hatred for Scotland and SNP.
The difference, Malcolm dear, is that we do not believe that love of Scotland is synonymous with love of the SNP - it is quite possible to love one and not the other.
Mr. G, surely Scots have a right to know what they're voting on?
MD, people know what they are voting on , it is very simple, Do we want to be an Independent Country. Every other nation in the world manages just fine, what makes Scotland so unusual that you think we cannot survive on our own using whatever currency we want. How many commonwealth countries have been knocking on Westminster door begging to come back. They were all robbed blind and managed to escape, hopefully we will do the same.
There appears to now be several groups of Scottish voters. 6) Those who will vote Yes because they cant stand being told what to do and what is good for them. They can decide that for themselves.
This group seems to be the one who will apparently be swung by this currency exchange.
I can't help but wonder that if they really are voting for independence on this basis, they're having their vote dictated just as much as someone who does what George tells them, rather than joining the small and sober group who can simple observe that independence would be very dangerous for the economic health of Scotland.
You people really are stupid
The SNP "rebuttal" in a nutshell.....
If the cap fits.............. and in your case it is a perfect fit
I am interested in this notion that you have to be right wing to believe that the SNP leadership's version of how the independence process will work is deeply flawed.
I'm amused that the foremost PB Romney on here still doesn't understand just how toxic out of touch politicians can be to their own cause.
You'll grasp it one day perhaps.
I do grasp it. Clearly there is a sizeable part of the Scottish electorate that will automatically dismiss what Osborne has said. And his intervention may well win Yes the referendum - indeed, it seems a landslide in favour of independence could now be on the cards. And if that is the case I will welcome it as it will indicate an irreconcilable alienation of the Scots from the rest of the UK.
But that still does not explain why you think that anyone disagreeing with the SNP leadership's version of how things will unfold after a Yes is right wing.
PB is dominated by far-right and right wing opinion. Hence the deafening shrieking from them on this issue despite it hardly being the first time the NO campaign have been banging away furiously on it. It started way back in 2012. Nor is it remotely surprising that those who seem offended by the very idea of Catalan Independence should join in with them.
Got it. Anyone who disagrees with you is right wing.
Really? I thought you had moved on from your cretinous "prejudice" remarks when anyone dared mention how out of touch a politician is. This is becoming almost as embarrassing for you as your Romney stupidity. By all means keep it up if you think it is productive.
Mick - I fear I am not embarrassed to question your labelling of people according to whether they share your opinions or not. I will, however, give up on hoping to get an answer from you on why it is right wing to disagree with the SNP leadership's version of Scotland's independence settlement.
I gave you a clear example of how it is not just right-wingers but also those who are offended by the very idea of Catalan Independence. For whatever reason I fear that seemed to upset you even more than the self-evident dominance of right wingers on PB shrieking away on this issue.
Mr. G, they don't know about the currency, which in turn dictates where monetary policy would be decided and has significant implications for the lender of last resort and potential fiscal restrictions.
Does Salmond actually believe what he is saying? It is clear to anyone neutral that there will not be a sterling currency union as he envisages, post a YES vote. The economic case is made plain, here:
Moreover, polls show that rUK voters want nothing to do with a currency union. So it really is NOT going to happen - or not in any form that would be acceptable to a newly independent Scotland.
Salmond is not an idiot, indeed he is an economist, so he must realise this. That leaves us with two options: he is a bare faced liar, or he is genuinely and bizarrely deluded (or maybe he is an idiot after all).
It's on that question that the referendum will turn.
Osbrowne, panda, ROFL.
It would be great to get an actual SNP supporter's actual response to the question you ask, but it isn't going to happen on here.
Andrew Neil didn't have much luck with getting the deputy leader to answer any either
'Nicola Sturgeon told Andrew Neil that she wanted Scotland "to pay its fair share of debt", but added that it could not default on debt "that is not legally Scotland's".'
That was an extraordinary statement to make.
Funny, unionists are always shocked when confronted with the truth.
Well, yes, Mr Osborne did say so recently - that the debt is 100% to be assigned to the UK, whatever happens with indy. Plus he evidently takes the view that EWNI would be the continuing state following on from the UK. So it is an entirelhy ordinary and accurate statement to make.
riven with vitriol and hatred for Scotland and SNP.
The difference, Malcolm dear, is that we do not believe that love of Scotland is synonymous with love of the SNP - it is quite possible to love one and not the other.
I do not have any connection to or affection for the SNP. Difference is I do not 100% denigrate Scotland like you. I just have hope we can make it a better country for everyone , whilst you want it destroyed and bankrupt.
Mr. G, surely Scots have a right to know what they're voting on?
MD, people know what they are voting on , it is very simple, Do we want to be an Independent Country. Every other nation in the world manages just fine, what makes Scotland so unusual that you think we cannot survive on our own using whatever currency we want. How many commonwealth countries have been knocking on Westminster door begging to come back. They were all robbed blind and managed to escape, hopefully we will do the same.
Would you be prepared to give the Shetlanders a right to self determination?
There appears to now be several groups of Scottish voters. 1) Those who will vote Yes because they hate England, the English and all things to do with the 1966 World Cup 2) Those who will vote Yes because they believe Scotland should be an independent country regardless of the financial and other consequences 3) Those who will vote Yes because they frankly only take from the state so have nothing to lose 4) Those who will vote Yes because they genuinely believe an independent Scotland will be an improvement on Scotland within the UK 5) Those who will vote Yes because Eck is never wrong 6) Those who will vote Yes because they cant stand being told what to do and what is good for them. They can decide that for themselves.
7) Those who wont vote or simply haven't a clue and if they vote, will decide at the last minute, possibly when in the voting booth.
8) Those who will vote No because they are unionist and believe in the UK even with all its flaws 9) Those who will vote No because they believe Keeping Together is the right thing to do for economic reasons 10) Those who will vote No because they cant stand Eck or the SNP
In the coming months we will see the support for 1-6 and 8-10 hardening up. It is the side which can attract most from 7 who should win as the vote will be much closer than most expect.
Good synopsis Easterross and given the NO campaign have next to no volunteers or local organisations and YES have vibrant organisations full of volunteers throughout the country it will be interesting to see if NO can maintain their position with only lies and the BBC for support.
Malcolm you are way off beam suggesting the No campaign has next to no volunteers etc. For months I have seen emails among and photos of groups of Better Together campaigners out most weekends leafleting and manning street stalls the length and breadth of Scotland. The remarkable thing has been how often these outings have been attended by political activists from the Scots Tory, LibDem and Labour parties working together.
We regularly get told how the Tory party is dying at grassroots. This is far from the truth. Membership of Tory Associations may be falling but the Scottish Tory Party has created a Supporters Organisation which has attracted several thousand people and hundreds of thousands of pounds in donations. At each of the recent by-elections there have been many Tory supporters doing the groundwork which is in part why in each of these elections the actual Tory vote share has increased, albeit from a pretty low base in some cases.
Mr. G, surely Scots have a right to know what they're voting on?
MD, people know what they are voting on , it is very simple, Do we want to be an Independent Country. Every other nation in the world manages just fine, what makes Scotland so unusual that you think we cannot survive on our own using whatever currency we want. How many commonwealth countries have been knocking on Westminster door begging to come back. They were all robbed blind and managed to escape, hopefully we will do the same.
Mr. G, they don't know about the currency, which in turn dictates where monetary policy would be decided and has significant implications for the lender of last resort and potential fiscal restrictions.
Morris, most people have no clue or wish to know about LOLR and fiscal restrictions. They know Westminster will beggar them if it is NO , whatever currency we use we will be no worse off than we are now and most likely to be better. You are living in cloud cuckoo land, when most people have nothing and foodbanks are mushrooming , currency is not foremost in your thinking.
Perhaps Salmond thought labour would have been more conciliatory on the point of a currency union and was shocked that all three main parties spoke with a united voice.
Considering that Salmond and the nationalists have spent much of the last decade trying to establish a dividing line on pro-/anti-independence, precisely in order to (1) establish independence as critical to every political subject, (2) to define the party debate as SNP vs the rest (Greens excepted), and (3) to sully Labour and Tory with each other, in their supporters' eyes - he shouldn't be too disappointed that it's come about in this case.
Mr. G, surely Scots have a right to know what they're voting on?
MD, people know what they are voting on , it is very simple, Do we want to be an Independent Country. Every other nation in the world manages just fine, what makes Scotland so unusual that you think we cannot survive on our own using whatever currency we want. How many commonwealth countries have been knocking on Westminster door begging to come back. They were all robbed blind and managed to escape, hopefully we will do the same.
Would you be prepared to give the Shetlanders a right to self determination?
How many times do I have to answer this question for you. Of course if that is what they wanted, then they could have a vote and get on with it. It si not going to happen though as nobody is interested in it.
Fellow BPers, I know the Independence Referendum is provoking strong feelings on both sides but please explain how describing another PBer as a cretin or by any other equally rude 'tag' advances the argument in any way. Surely we are all above the name calling!
Mr. G, surely Scots have a right to know what they're voting on?
MD, people know what they are voting on , it is very simple, Do we want to be an Independent Country. Every other nation in the world manages just fine, what makes Scotland so unusual that you think we cannot survive on our own using whatever currency we want. How many commonwealth countries have been knocking on Westminster door begging to come back. They were all robbed blind and managed to escape, hopefully we will do the same.
Would you be prepared to give the Shetlanders a right to self determination?
Is it not illegal under international law to do otherwise?
Mr. G, I find it hard to believe Scotland is in a terrible state compared to the rest of the UK.
Furthermore, food banks are an unfair point because they've increased significantly every single year since they first emerged (mid-2000s, I think). Capacity has yet to reach demand, and their use rose even during the boom, so they cannot legitimately be used to score political points.
'You people really are stupid, there are many options open re currency and Salmond is certainly not going to enlighten thick Westminster politicians to which order he has as his selection.'
Fast running out of options,Euro wanted & then rejected by Salmond, Sterling (millstone around our neck) currency union now rejected by all Westminster parties,what's it going to be Sterling outside a currency union or the Groat?
There appears to now be several groups of Scottish voters. .
Malcolm you are way off beam suggesting the No campaign has next to no volunteers etc. For months I have seen emails among and photos of groups of Better Together campaigners out most weekends leafleting and manning street stalls the length and breadth of Scotland. The remarkable thing has been how often these outings have been attended by political activists from the Scots Tory, LibDem and Labour parties working together.
We regularly get told how the Tory party is dying at grassroots. This is far from the truth. Membership of Tory Associations may be falling but the Scottish Tory Party has created a Supporters Organisation which has attracted several thousand people and hundreds of thousands of pounds in donations. At each of the recent by-elections there have been many Tory supporters doing the groundwork which is in part why in each of these elections the actual Tory vote share has increased, albeit from a pretty low base in some cases.
Easterross , I have seen their pictures etc , just the other day Shorthouse said at a BT launch meeting that they "had no volunteers". They manage a few stalls and nothing more. Look at their online presence , tumbleweed, look at organised meetings .... hardly any. They do not like public meetings as it means they have to answer questions and it is harder to lie in person than on a leaflet.
Fellow BPers, I know the Independence Referendum is provoking strong feelings on both sides but please explain how describing another PBer as a cretin or by any other equally rude 'tag' advances the argument in any way. Surely we are all above the name calling!
In other news, good to have a conservationist with hands on experience.
dominic dyer @domdyer70 2 hrs Clarence House been working overtime to stop this image going social media to tabloids they failed Royal Hypocrisy ! http://pic.twitter.com/ym5mDLmK4z
Mr. G, surely Scots have a right to know what they're voting on?
MD, people know what they are voting on , it is very simple, Do we want to be an Independent Country. Every other nation in the world manages just fine, what makes Scotland so unusual that you think we cannot survive on our own using whatever currency we want. How many commonwealth countries have been knocking on Westminster door begging to come back. They were all robbed blind and managed to escape, hopefully we will do the same.
Would you be prepared to give the Shetlanders a right to self determination?
How many times do I have to answer this question for you. Of course if that is what they wanted, then they could have a vote and get on with it. It si not going to happen though as nobody is interested in it.
@Mick_Pork - Why would I be offended by Catalan independence? I am certainly offended by Catalan nationalists who are intolerant of other opinions and question the patriotism/politics of those who express them; but I guess that's because I find those who seek to create and amplify differences between people who are fundamentally the same pretty ridiculous -especially those who describe themselves as being on the left.
Mr. G, surely Scots have a right to know what they're voting on?
MD, people know what they are voting on , it is very simple, Do we want to be an Independent Country. Every other nation in the world manages just fine, what makes Scotland so unusual that you think we cannot survive on our own using whatever currency we want. How many commonwealth countries have been knocking on Westminster door begging to come back. They were all robbed blind and managed to escape, hopefully we will do the same.
Would you be prepared to give the Shetlanders a right to self determination?
How many times do I have to answer this question for you. Of course if that is what they wanted, then they could have a vote and get on with it. It si not going to happen though as nobody is interested in it.
And what do the Scots think? Do they honestly believe the ludicrous notion that the entire British establishment is lying?
His original position was a plausible (if in my view a reckless) one: Independence is our non-negotiable requirement, but we don't see why we shouldn't do all the good and friendly things that happen now between Scotland and the other British nations. It will be a partnership of equals. He then developed policy on the assumption that these "partners" would sign up to his view of things. Indeed, the RUK could if it minded to join a currency union. Unfortunately, those people don't agree with Alex Salmond's agenda, nor do they owe him any favours, so they turned him down flat. Now he is in untenable position: he can't say, let's do something completely different, nor, clearly, can he deliver on what he originally promised.
Opinion in Scotland like elsewhere is not monolithic. we know the rough splits: 30% for Independence come what may; similar number confirmed for the Union; 20% in the Sceptical but Could be Convinced camp currently tending to No and 20% Don't Knows including some more Scepticals but Could be Convinced.
The effect of the latest shambles on the Scepticals but Could be Convinced mob is a really interesting question. The Yes campaign claim that they will be insulted into voting for them. I suspect their scepticism will only be confirmed. But I don't think the polls will move much. The Yes core is firm. Their aim during this never ending campaign was to get the Scepticals to move to them. This has only slightly happened, even in optimistic polls.
Comments
This is religion, not science......
You seem perfectly happy with the way No is running the campaign. I wish I had your confidence.
Do you not see the strategic flaw with Osborne telling Scots they can't do something?
Yes but you are looking at this from a Scottish perspective.
How long do you think a RUK government that allowed Scotland a say in its currency would last? Especially with the tories against, and in a parliament shorn of 40 Labour MPs.
Unless, of course, your banks are fully under Bank of England control in which case Scotland would definitely prefer the Euro to £....
I don't the rUK would vastly prefer Scotland to be in a sterling currency union than members of the EZ. That is not what the politicians of all 3 parties are saying and I see no reason to not believe them. Indeed, if you read Osborne's speech, it is clear this has been given serious thought and the opposite conclusion has been reached.
Whether this helps or hinders the Yes campaign is harder to say. I tend to agree with Sean T that it will help in the short term but hinder more in the medium term once people think through the implications but we really need polling as this is no more than a hunch.
Were it an English Independence referendum, I'd expect the losing leader to resign.
If its a strategic flaw, why do you think Milli and Ballsie fell right in behind Osborne?
I am looking at it from the point of view of preserving the Union, the loss of which I think would be a disaster for everyone, not least England. But were it to come about as you say, I would be surprised if even a Con/UKIP rUK administration would prefer to see the Scots in the euro rather than in Sterling. Of course the issue of rUK EU membership would loom large in this as well.
Political Lives: David Abrahams
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-25869867
Reading that you would be convinced he got totally stitched up by the nasty media....
Whether it's better for "Yes" or "No" is neither here nor there - it's better for the campaign in total. The Scots will make a better informed decision and that can only be a good thing.
Billy Connolly says he's not going to vote in the referendum. "I've never been a nationalist and I've never been a patriot." #indyref
1) Those who will vote Yes because they hate England, the English and all things to do with the 1966 World Cup
2) Those who will vote Yes because they believe Scotland should be an independent country regardless of the financial and other consequences
3) Those who will vote Yes because they frankly only take from the state so have nothing to lose
4) Those who will vote Yes because they genuinely believe an independent Scotland will be an improvement on Scotland within the UK
5) Those who will vote Yes because Eck is never wrong
6) Those who will vote Yes because they cant stand being told what to do and what is good for them. They can decide that for themselves.
7) Those who wont vote or simply haven't a clue and if they vote, will decide at the last minute, possibly when in the voting booth.
8) Those who will vote No because they are unionist and believe in the UK even with all its flaws
9) Those who will vote No because they believe Keeping Together is the right thing to do for economic reasons
10) Those who will vote No because they cant stand Eck or the SNP
In the coming months we will see the support for 1-6 and 8-10 hardening up. It is the side which can attract most from 7 who should win as the vote will be much closer than most expect.
You'll grasp it one day perhaps.
I guess a RUK government would prefer Scotland in sterling, but any RUK government that allowed Scotland A SAY in sterling, when it had just turned its back on England, would surely reap a whirlwind at the English ballot box.
I don't understand why he has done it. Has he got too used to getting his own way in the Scottish Parliament? Has the pathetic nature of the Scottish media lulled him into a false sense of security? Or was he just desperate to get English tories front and central no matter what the risks and what the price was?
He may be able to bluster his way out of this but it is high risk and strange tactics for someone who is supposedly a clever politician.
If you believe the Scots are so sensitive that they will make a decision on Independence based on who gives a speech on the prospects of a currency union, then you have already lost.
It would be great to get an actual SNP supporter's actual response to the question you ask, but it isn't going to happen on here.
I would advise strongly against a currency union as currently advocated, if Scotland were to vote for independence. Why?
http://www.politicshome.com/uk/article/92901/treasury_permanent_secretarys_letter_to_osborne_on_scottish_currency_union.html
Notably, Salmond did not address any of these concerns today....
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-26175401
It is always the same 3 stooges, feeding each other
Do you think Salmond believes what he is saying?
That was an extraordinary statement to make.
A bit patronising to suggest anything other than a tiny tiny minority would immediately react to the nationality of the speaker - I speak here as a Scot.
But that still does not explain why you think that anyone disagreeing with the SNP leadership's version of how things will unfold after a Yes is right wing.
I can't help but wonder that if they really are voting for independence on this basis, they're having their vote dictated just as much as someone who does what George tells them, rather than joining the small and sober group who can simple observe that independence would be very dangerous for the economic health of Scotland.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/17/eurozone-countries-united-states-europe-viviane-reding
Net support sharing pound with Scotland- VI:
Con: -58
Lab: -18
LibD: -38
UKIP: -68
Of course that Łab figure could be affected to an extent by Scottish Labour voters....
http://cdn.yougov.com/cumulus_uploads/document/s1ec3emgrq/YG-Archive-140214-Scotland-Pound.pdf
Neil regardless of whether a currency union with Scotland is in RUK's economic interest or not, such a policy is surely an impossible sell to the English electorate post Scottish independence. Impossible and suicidal.
Why else would labour and the libs fall in behind Osborne?
And that's a point that's perhaps being missed. Scottish secession would change England. Undoubtedly. And perhaps change it quite radically. Perhaps change it more than Scotland.
Juli @julijuxtaposed 7h
Miliband snubs Clegg's openness to Lab-Lib pact: "I think Nick Clegg should be worried about the Liberal Democrats" http://gu.com/p/3mz5x/tw
Can't see how that could possibly affect politics.
*chortle*
We regularly get told how the Tory party is dying at grassroots. This is far from the truth. Membership of Tory Associations may be falling but the Scottish Tory Party has created a Supporters Organisation which has attracted several thousand people and hundreds of thousands of pounds in donations. At each of the recent by-elections there have been many Tory supporters doing the groundwork which is in part why in each of these elections the actual Tory vote share has increased, albeit from a pretty low base in some cases.
I have heard similar sentiments in a number of other commonwealth countries.
Furthermore, food banks are an unfair point because they've increased significantly every single year since they first emerged (mid-2000s, I think). Capacity has yet to reach demand, and their use rose even during the boom, so they cannot legitimately be used to score political points.
'You people really are stupid, there are many options open re currency and Salmond is certainly not going to enlighten thick Westminster politicians to which order he has as his selection.'
Fast running out of options,Euro wanted & then rejected by Salmond, Sterling (millstone around our neck) currency union now rejected by all Westminster parties,what's it going to be Sterling outside a currency union or the Groat?
dominic dyer @domdyer70 2 hrs
Clarence House been working overtime to stop this image going social media to tabloids they failed Royal Hypocrisy ! http://pic.twitter.com/ym5mDLmK4z
http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/jun/30/shetland-independence-vote-scotland
Opinion in Scotland like elsewhere is not monolithic. we know the rough splits: 30% for Independence come what may; similar number confirmed for the Union; 20% in the Sceptical but Could be Convinced camp currently tending to No and 20% Don't Knows including some more Scepticals but Could be Convinced.
The effect of the latest shambles on the Scepticals but Could be Convinced mob is a really interesting question. The Yes campaign claim that they will be insulted into voting for them. I suspect their scepticism will only be confirmed. But I don't think the polls will move much. The Yes core is firm. Their aim during this never ending campaign was to get the Scepticals to move to them. This has only slightly happened, even in optimistic polls.